Re: F40 Change Proposal: F40 Change Proposal: Unify /usr/bin and /usr/sbin (System-Wide)

[Gary Buhrmaster]

On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 9:43 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
 wrote:

> Indeed. With both dnf-5 and dnf5, the inner repoquery doesn't list exabgp.
> Either a bug or I'm doing something wrong.

And while I can hope that exabgp might be the
singleton case, I really don't think you, or I, or
other packagers (or FESCo), want to be surprised
as to the potential impacts.

Thanks for being willing to look further.
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Re: [heads-up] evolution-data-server libecal-2.0 soname version bump in rawhide

[kevin]

On Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 11:05:33AM +0100, Milan Crha wrote:
> On Mon, 2024-01-08 at 10:34 +0100, Milan Crha wrote:
> > I'll handle those I've commit rights for, which is most of them.
> >
> > ...
> >
> >fedpkg build --target=f40-build-side-80962
> 
> 
>   Hi,
> the leftover packages to be done, for which I do not have commit
> rights, are:
> 
>elementary-calendar
>evolution-chime (which is part of pidgin-chime)
>gnome-panel
>phosh

Phosh is done.

kevin


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[EPEL-devel] Fedora EPEL 8 updates-testing report

[updates]

The following Fedora EPEL 8 Security updates need testing:
 Age  URL
   5  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2024-155a6ac298   
putty-0.80-1.el8
   5  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2024-3a29f0d349   
python-paramiko-2.12.0-2.el8
   5  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2024-9bc09085c7   
exim-4.97.1-1.el8
   4  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2024-fe4d2e754f   
zabbix6.0-6.0.25-1.el8
   3  https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-EPEL-2024-39ec948d57   
chromium-120.0.6099.199-1.el8


The following builds have been pushed to Fedora EPEL 8 updates-testing

syncthing-1.27.2-1.el8

Details about builds:



 syncthing-1.27.2-1.el8 (FEDORA-EPEL-2024-7d02a97f8a)
 Continuous File Synchronization

Update Information:

Update to version 1.27.2.  Release notes:
https://github.com/syncthing/syncthing/releases/tag/v1.27.2

ChangeLog:

* Mon Jan  8 2024 Fabio Valentini  - 1.27.2-1
- Update to version 1.27.2; Fixes RHBZ#2256512


--
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2256272] perl-DateTime-TimeZone-2.61 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256272

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version|perl-DateTime-TimeZone-2.61 |perl-DateTime-TimeZone-2.61
   |-1.fc40 |-1.fc40
   ||perl-DateTime-TimeZone-2.61
   ||-1.fc39



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-58302e0eb1 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256272

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202256272%23c6
--
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2256825] perl-App-cpm-0.997015 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256825



--- Comment #4 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-962cfe8374 has been pushed to the Fedora 39 testing repository.
Soon you'll be able to install the update with the following command:
`sudo dnf upgrade --enablerepo=updates-testing --refresh
--advisory=FEDORA-2024-962cfe8374`
You can provide feedback for this update here:
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-962cfe8374

See also https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Updates_Testing for more information
on how to test updates.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256825

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202256825%23c4
--
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F40 Change Proposal: LLVM 18 (System-Wide)

[Tom Stellard]

On 1/5/24 05:18, Stephen Gallagher wrote:

On Fri, Dec 22, 2023 at 8:05 PM Aoife Moloney  wrote:


Wiki -> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/LLVM-18

This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes
process, proposals are publicly announced in order to receive
community feedback. This proposal will only be implemented if approved
by the Fedora Engineering Steering Committee.

== Summary ==
Update all llvm sub-projects in Fedora Linux to version 18.


== Owner ==
* Name: [[User:tstellar| Tom Stellard]]
* Email: 


== Detailed Description ==
All llvm sub-projects in Fedora will be updated to version 18, and
there will be a soname version change for the llvm libraries.
Compatibility packages clang17, llvm17, and lld17 will be added to
ensure that packages that currently depend on clang and llvm version
17 libraries will continue to work.  We may add other compatibility
packages too if they're determined to be necessary to maintain
functionality in other RPMS that use llvm/clang.  We also plan to
retire these older compatibility packages (that we own):

* llvm14
* llvm15
* llvm16
* clang14
* clang15
* clang16
* lld14
* lld15
* lld16

We will also be asking the maintainers of the following packages to
retire them if possible:

* llvm7.0
* llvm8.0
* llvm11
* llvm12
* llvm13

Other notable changes:

* clang will emit DWARF-5 by default instead of DWARF-4.  This matches
the upstream default.  We have been using DWARF-4 as the default for
the last few releases due to:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2064052
* The compatibility packages will now include the same content as the
main package.  In previous releases, the compatibility packages
contained only libraries and headers, and the binaries and other
content was stripped out.  These packages will be supported for use as
dependencies for other RPM packages, but not for general purpose usage
by end users.  Fedora users should use Clang/LLVM 18.
* The compatibility packages added for Fedora 40 will be retired prior
to the Fedora 41 branch.
* We will be enabling Fat LTO in redhat-rpm-config if this feature is
complete in time for the upstream LLVM 18 release.  Fat LTO is a
feature that allows the compiler to produce libraries that contain LTO
bitcode along side the traditional ELF binary code so that the
libraries can be linked in both LTO mode and non-LTO mode.  gcc also
supports this feature and has it enabled in Fedora.  In Fedora 39 and
older, with LTO enabled, clang produces binaries with only LTO
bitcode, so we need to run a post-processing script
(brp-llvm-compile-to-elf) on the libraries to convert them to ELF code
so they can be used by other packages.  Enabling Fat LTO will allow us
to remove this script and simplify the build process.

===LLVM Build Schedule===

Important Dates

* Jan  26: Upstream: 18.0.0-rc1 Release
* Feb   6: Fedora: f40 branch created
* Feb   6: Upstream: 18.0.0-rc2 Release
* Feb  20: Fedora: f40 Beta Freeze
* Feb  20: Upstream: 18.0.0-rc3 Release
* Mar   5: Upstream: 18.0.0 Release
* Apr   2: Fedora: f40 Final Freeze

Plan
# Build nightly trunk (LLVM 18) snapshots in
[https://copr.fedorainfracloud.org/coprs/g/fedora-llvm-team/llvm-snapshots/packages/
copr].
# Build LLVM 18.0.0-rc1 in COPR.
# Build LLVM 18.0.0-rc1 into a rawhide side-tag in Koji.
# Build LLVM 18.0.0-rc1 into a f39 side-tag in Koji.
# Build LLVM 18.0.0-rc2 into a rawhide side-tag in Koji.
# Build LLVM 18.0.0-rc2 into a f39 side-tag in Koji.
# Build LLVM 18.0.0-rc3 into a rawhide side-tag in Koji
# Build LLVM 18.0.0-rc3 into a f39 side-tag in Koji
# Push F39 Bodhi Update with 18.0.0-rc3 (or 18.0.0-rc2 if -rc3 is not
ready) as a Beta Freeze exception.
# Continue building new release candidates and pushing them to stable
until the Final Freeze.

We are not planning to push 18.0.0-rc1 into rawhide because the
library ABI is not stabilized at that point. Typically, the ABI
stabilizes after -rc3, but there are no guarantees from upstream about
this.  Given the history of minimal ABI changes after -rc3, we feel
like it's safe to push -rc3 into rawhide.  The worst case scenario
would be an ABI change -rc4 or the final release that we force us to
patch LLVM to maintain compatibility with the -rc3 ABI.  This scenario
would not require rebuilding LLVM library users in Fedora, so this
would not require much extra work from our team.

Updates after 18.0.0-rc3 will generally be very small and can be done
after the Final Freeze is over.  If we are late packaging release
candidates after -rc3 or the final release, we will not ask for a
Final Freeze exception, unless they contain a fix for a critical
release blocking bug.

== Feedback ==



This came in while I was on PTO, so my apologies for the late reply on it.

My concern here is with the timing and its inclusion into Fedora ELN
(and, by extension, CentOS Stream 10). The public plan for CS 10 is
that it will break inheritance from Fedora Rawhide/ELN at the Fedora
40 branch point 

[Bug 2256089] please enable builds for EPEL8 and EPEL9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256089

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version|perl-Data-Validate-Domain-0 |perl-Data-Validate-Domain-0
   |.15-7.el9   |.15-7.el9
   ||perl-Data-Validate-Domain-0
   ||.15-7.el8



--- Comment #6 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2023-880a437f82 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 stable
repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256089

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202256089%23c6
--
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2255872] TRIAGE CVE-2023-7101 perl-Spreadsheet-ParseExcel: unvalidated input can lead to arbitrary code execution vulnerability [epel-all]

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2255872

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version|perl-Spreadsheet-ParseExcel |perl-Spreadsheet-ParseExcel
   |-0.6600-1.el7   |-0.6600-1.el7
   |perl-Spreadsheet-ParseExcel |perl-Spreadsheet-ParseExcel
   |-0.6600-1.el9   |-0.6600-1.el9
   ||perl-Spreadsheet-ParseExcel
   ||-0.6600-1.el8



--- Comment #10 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2023-c87fdba1fc has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 8 stable
repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2255872

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202255872%23c10
--
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2255872] TRIAGE CVE-2023-7101 perl-Spreadsheet-ParseExcel: unvalidated input can lead to arbitrary code execution vulnerability [epel-all]

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2255872

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version|perl-Spreadsheet-ParseExcel |perl-Spreadsheet-ParseExcel
   |-0.6600-1.el7   |-0.6600-1.el7
   ||perl-Spreadsheet-ParseExcel
   ||-0.6600-1.el9



--- Comment #9 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2023-735fe09bcb has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 stable
repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2255872

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202255872%23c9
--
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2256089] please enable builds for EPEL8 and EPEL9

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256089

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
   Fixed In Version||perl-Data-Validate-Domain-0
   ||.15-7.el9
Last Closed||2024-01-09 00:39:51



--- Comment #5 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2023-36552cef2d has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 9 stable
repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256089

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202256089%23c5
--
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2255872] TRIAGE CVE-2023-7101 perl-Spreadsheet-ParseExcel: unvalidated input can lead to arbitrary code execution vulnerability [epel-all]

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2255872

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
   Fixed In Version||perl-Spreadsheet-ParseExcel
   ||-0.6600-1.el7
 Status|ON_QA   |CLOSED
Last Closed||2024-01-09 00:30:18



--- Comment #8 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-EPEL-2023-60e0cc89b7 has been pushed to the Fedora EPEL 7 stable
repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2255872

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202255872%23c8
--
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F40 Change Proposal: F40 Change Proposal: Unify /usr/bin and /usr/sbin (System-Wide)

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 03:26:45PM +, Gary Buhrmaster wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 1:37 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
>  wrote:
> >
> > On Sun, Jan 07, 2024 at 03:47:25PM +, Gary Buhrmaster wrote:
> > > On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 7:54 PM Aoife Moloney  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Wiki -> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Unify_bin_and_sbin
> > > >
> > >
> > > I do not see as part of the plan a process to
> > > go through all Fedora packages and identifying
> > > binaries in /usr/bin that have the same name
> > > as a binary in /usr/sbin (from the same, or
> > > different packages) such that the packager
> > > (or the multiple packages) will need to
> > > coordinate the changes (perhaps by engaging
> > > upstream).
> >
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Unify_bin_and_sbin#Scope
> > lists 9 packages that was aware of that use usermode.
> >
> > $ dnf5 repoquery -l $(dnf5 repoquery --whatprovides '/usr/sbin/*' --qf 
> > '%{name}\n') | rg '/usr/s?bin/' | sed -r 's|(.*)/([^/]*)$|\2|' | sort | 
> > uniq -c | rg -w 2
> >
> > says that /usr/sbin/{makemap,rpcinfo,rpcbind,sestatus,udevadm}
> > "shadow" files in /usr/bin. But those are all symlinks, i.e. they will
> > need just to be dropped to prevent a FTBFS. I added this list with
> > four packages to the Scope section.
> 
> Thanks, but I think the query does not produce
> all possible results, as I know for a fact that there is
> a package (exabgp) that has both a /usr/sbin/exabgp-healthcheck
> and a (different) /usr/bin/exabgp-healthcheck file
> (which is why I prompted my query, as I expect
> there might be others (I plan to fix exabgp)).

Indeed. With both dnf-5 and dnf5, the inner repoquery doesn't list exabgp.
Either a bug or I'm doing something wrong.

Zbyszek
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Fedora Linux 37 is EOL

[Adam Williamson]

On Mon, 2024-01-08 at 13:57 -0500, Ben Cotton wrote:
> On 08-01-2024 17:16, Adam Williamson wrote:
> 
> > Doing it this way was Ben's preference (he wanted to be able to see
> > that every bug was updated and get a notice from the script for any
> > single bug change that failed),
> 
> Historically, the script ran much faster than Bugzilla, which meant
> after a while, we'd start getting timeouts. This is why there are
> pauses built into the script. A few years ago, the performance of
> Bugzilla improved greatly, but I never felt like exploring where the
> boundaries are. Updating all matching bugs in one transaction is still
> probably going to result in timeouts, but smaller chunks should work
> well enough.

If Bugzilla is engineered *at all* sanely, it should be much less work
for it to process a single request to do the same thing to 500 bugs
than it is to process 500 individual requests to do the same thing to a
single bug. There probably *is* a limit on the number of bugs you can
request changes to at once, but it should be simple enough to find out
what that ceiling is and work in batches below it.
-- 
Adam Williamson (he/him/his)
Fedora QA
Fedora Chat: @adamwill:fedora.im | Mastodon: @ad...@fosstodon.org
https://www.happyassassin.net



--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

F40 Approved Change Announcement (2024-01-08)

[Stephen Gallagher]

There is no FESCo meeting scheduled for today due to the close
proximity to the previous meeting. However, we have two approved
Changes to announce:

= Discussed and Voted in the Ticket =

Change: Boost 1.83 Upgrade
https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3127
APPROVED (+7, 0, -0)

Change: Podman 5
https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/3126
APPROVED (+6, 0, -0)
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Fedora Linux 37 is EOL

[Ben Cotton]

On 08-01-2024 17:16, Adam Williamson wrote:

> Doing it this way was Ben's preference (he wanted to be able to see
> that every bug was updated and get a notice from the script for any
> single bug change that failed),

Historically, the script ran much faster than Bugzilla, which meant
after a while, we'd start getting timeouts. This is why there are
pauses built into the script. A few years ago, the performance of
Bugzilla improved greatly, but I never felt like exploring where the
boundaries are. Updating all matching bugs in one transaction is still
probably going to result in timeouts, but smaller chunks should work
well enough. Of course, that means a transient failure could cause
many bugs to need to be re-run instead of just one. That's not to say
it can't be done, but it was never a priority for me.

On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 11:30 AM Sandro  wrote:
>
> I just noticed that some bugs with version '37' were still open while
> others were already closed.

I'm not saying that's what happened here, but it's not uncommon to see
bugs that are closed EOL get re-opened but not have an updated
version. For a long time, I never checked that when putting the bug
count lists in the Friday's Fedora Facts posts. The first time I did,
there were hundreds of bugs across several EOL releases. :-)

-- 
Ben Cotton (he/him)
TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Bcotton
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: [heads-up] evolution-data-server libecal-2.0 soname version bump in rawhide

[Yaakov Selkowitz]

On Mon, 2024-01-08 at 11:05 +0100, Milan Crha wrote:
> On Mon, 2024-01-08 at 10:34 +0100, Milan Crha wrote:
> > I'll handle those I've commit rights for, which is most of them.
> > 
> > ...
> > 
> >    fedpkg build --target=f40-build-side-80962
> 
> 
>   Hi,
> the leftover packages to be done, for which I do not have commit
> rights, are:
> 
>    elementary-calendar
>    evolution-chime (which is part of pidgin-chime)
>    gnome-panel
>    phosh
> 
> Any help appreciated.

gnome-panel is now built in the side tag.

-- 
Yaakov Selkowitz
Principal Software Engineer - Emerging RHEL
Red Hat, Inc.
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Fedora Linux 37 is EOL

[Adam Williamson]

On Mon, 2024-01-08 at 18:10 +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> Dne 08. 01. 24 v 13:00 Sandro napsal(a):
> > On 05-12-2023 18:45, Tomas Hrcka wrote:
> > > Fedora Linux 37 has gone end of life for updates and support on 
> > > 2023-12-05.
> > > No more updates of any kind, including security updates or security
> > > announcements, will be available for Fedora Linux 37 after the said
> > > date. All the updates of Fedora Linux 37 being pushed to stable will be
> > > stopped as well.
> > 
> > 
> > As part of the EOL tasks all bugs open for F37 receive an EOL notice, 
> > first, and sometime later they will change status to CLOSED | EOL, 
> > unless the version is changed.
> > 
> > It seems the first step (notification) happened, but the second step 
> > (closing) has not completed. IIRC, I saw some bugs being closed, but I 
> > also see a lot of F37 bugs still open [1].
> > 
> > Is that an oversight or did something go wrong during the procedure? I 
> > cc'ed Aoife, who appears to have run the first step. I'm happy to open 
> > a ticket if required.
> 
> 
> There also used to be Rawhide bugs reassigned to latest stable Fedora, I 
> might have missed something, but I don't think that has happened.

I don't think that's quite right. What happens is that Rawhide bugs get
moved to the *new branched* (not stable) release, and naturally, this
happens at branch time, which hasn't happened for F40 yet.

https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/program_management/pgm_guide/sop/branch/
-- 
Adam Williamson (he/him/his)
Fedora QA
Fedora Chat: @adamwill:fedora.im | Mastodon: @ad...@fosstodon.org
https://www.happyassassin.net



--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Fedora Linux 37 is EOL

[Vít Ondruch]

Dne 08. 01. 24 v 13:00 Sandro napsal(a):

On 05-12-2023 18:45, Tomas Hrcka wrote:
Fedora Linux 37 has gone end of life for updates and support on 
2023-12-05.

No more updates of any kind, including security updates or security
announcements, will be available for Fedora Linux 37 after the said
date. All the updates of Fedora Linux 37 being pushed to stable will be
stopped as well.



As part of the EOL tasks all bugs open for F37 receive an EOL notice, 
first, and sometime later they will change status to CLOSED | EOL, 
unless the version is changed.


It seems the first step (notification) happened, but the second step 
(closing) has not completed. IIRC, I saw some bugs being closed, but I 
also see a lot of F37 bugs still open [1].


Is that an oversight or did something go wrong during the procedure? I 
cc'ed Aoife, who appears to have run the first step. I'm happy to open 
a ticket if required.



There also used to be Rawhide bugs reassigned to latest stable Fedora, I 
might have missed something, but I don't think that has happened.



Vít




OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2257292] New: perl-CGI-4.61 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2257292

Bug ID: 2257292
   Summary: perl-CGI-4.61 is available
   Product: Fedora
   Version: rawhide
Status: NEW
 Component: perl-CGI
  Keywords: FutureFeature, Triaged
  Assignee: jples...@redhat.com
  Reporter: upstream-release-monitor...@fedoraproject.org
QA Contact: extras...@fedoraproject.org
CC: jples...@redhat.com, mmasl...@redhat.com,
mspa...@redhat.com, perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
  Target Milestone: ---
Classification: Fedora



Releases retrieved: 4.61
Upstream release that is considered latest: 4.61
Current version/release in rawhide: 4.60-2.fc40
URL: https://metacpan.org/dist/CGI/

Please consult the package updates policy before you issue an update to a
stable branch: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Updates_Policy/


More information about the service that created this bug can be found at:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/package-maintainers/Upstream_Release_Monitoring


Please keep in mind that with any upstream change, there may also be packaging
changes that need to be made. Specifically, please remember that it is your
responsibility to review the new version to ensure that the licensing is still
correct and that no non-free or legally problematic items have been added
upstream.


Based on the information from Anitya:
https://release-monitoring.org/project/2687/


To change the monitoring settings for the project, please visit:
https://src.fedoraproject.org/rpms/perl-CGI


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2257292

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202257292%23c0
--
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: [heads-up] evolution-data-server libecal-2.0 soname version bump in rawhide

[Fabio Valentini]

On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 11:06 AM Milan Crha  wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2024-01-08 at 10:34 +0100, Milan Crha wrote:
> > I'll handle those I've commit rights for, which is most of them.
> >
> > ...
> >
> >fedpkg build --target=f40-build-side-80962
>
>
> Hi,
> the leftover packages to be done, for which I do not have commit
> rights, are:
>
>elementary-calendar
>evolution-chime (which is part of pidgin-chime)
>gnome-panel
>phosh
>
> Any help appreciated.

elementary-calendar is now rebuilt in the side tag.

Fabio
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Fedora Linux 37 is EOL

[Sandro]

On 08-01-2024 17:16, Adam Williamson wrote:

On Mon, 2024-01-08 at 16:10 +, Aoife Moloney wrote:

I'll get the EOL-close script running again, it kept timing out so I
thought it was finished but clearly not - my mistake and apologies :-/


Just so folks are aware, the EOL closure uses a script:
https://pagure.io/fedora-pgm/pgm_scripts/blob/main/f/closebugs/fedora_bz.py
which runs bug-by-bug - so it comments on, or closes, one bug at a
time. This means it takes a very long time to do the ~2-3k bugs that
are typically commented-on then closed at EOL time.

Doing it this way was Ben's preference (he wanted to be able to see
that every bug was updated and get a notice from the script for any
single bug change that failed), but if it causes problems for Aoife we
can have it mass-update bugs instead, since Bugzilla and its API allow
that (now, they probably didn't when the predecessors to this script
were written). I'll just have to check with the BZ admin whether
there's any upper limit on how many bugs you can request a mass change
to at once.


I just noticed that some bugs with version '37' were still open while 
others were already closed.


I think it makes perfect sense to do a mass update to the extend 
possible to have this process finish quicker. It's fairly easy to query 
for bugs that may have been missed afterwards. That's essentially what I 
did with my query.


You may also have to check with mail admins, because it might break the 
levees of the mail river doing a mass update, I could imagine.


-- Sandro

--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[EPEL-devel] VLC via EPEL vs via RPMFUSION

[Leon Fauster via epel-devel]

Hi all,

it seems that VLC is in EPEL9 now. Looks like some license changes
allows packaging some multimedia stuff now. I noticed also the
new epel-cisco-openh264 repo.

Unfortunately, I'm not involved in the upstream/Fedora discussions.
So, I miss some kind of documentation. A look into Fedoras Wiki also
doesn't show any article that explains the current status/motivation
/limitations of such components and their differences to RPMFUSIONs one.
Also the concept of "freeworld" packages is unclear (at least to me).

Some RPMFUSION packages were in conflict with the new packages in epel-
testing. Currently, the conflicts are resolved but the epel-testing
packages would overwrite the ones installed from RPMFUSION now
(someone stated no assurance for such repo compatibility).

Any pointers to sources/docs/threads that explains the new strategies 
and activities or any other suggestions to read would be greatly

appreciated. BTW, do the RPMFUSION and Fedora Devs coordinate such
overlap? Where?


--
Thanks,
Leon
--
___
epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Fedora Linux 37 is EOL

[Adam Williamson]

On Mon, 2024-01-08 at 16:10 +, Aoife Moloney wrote:
> I'll get the EOL-close script running again, it kept timing out so I
> thought it was finished but clearly not - my mistake and apologies :-/

Just so folks are aware, the EOL closure uses a script:
https://pagure.io/fedora-pgm/pgm_scripts/blob/main/f/closebugs/fedora_bz.py
which runs bug-by-bug - so it comments on, or closes, one bug at a
time. This means it takes a very long time to do the ~2-3k bugs that
are typically commented-on then closed at EOL time.

Doing it this way was Ben's preference (he wanted to be able to see
that every bug was updated and get a notice from the script for any
single bug change that failed), but if it causes problems for Aoife we
can have it mass-update bugs instead, since Bugzilla and its API allow
that (now, they probably didn't when the predecessors to this script
were written). I'll just have to check with the BZ admin whether
there's any upper limit on how many bugs you can request a mass change
to at once.
-- 
Adam Williamson (he/him/his)
Fedora QA
Fedora Chat: @adamwill:fedora.im | Mastodon: @ad...@fosstodon.org
https://www.happyassassin.net



--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2257119] perl-DBIx-Class-Schema-Loader-0.07052 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2257119

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
   Fixed In Version||perl-DBIx-Class-Schema-Load
   ||er-0.07052-1.fc40
 Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED
Last Closed||2024-01-08 15:36:23



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-30fb609fa7 has been pushed to the Fedora 40 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2257119

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202257119%23c2
--
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2257119] perl-DBIx-Class-Schema-Loader-0.07052 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2257119

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |MODIFIED



--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-30fb609fa7 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 40.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-30fb609fa7


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2257119

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202257119%23c1
--
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F40 Change Proposal: F40 Change Proposal: Unify /usr/bin and /usr/sbin (System-Wide)

[Gary Buhrmaster]

On Mon, Jan 8, 2024 at 1:37 PM Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
 wrote:
>
> On Sun, Jan 07, 2024 at 03:47:25PM +, Gary Buhrmaster wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 7:54 PM Aoife Moloney  wrote:
> > >
> > > Wiki -> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Unify_bin_and_sbin
> > >
> >
> > I do not see as part of the plan a process to
> > go through all Fedora packages and identifying
> > binaries in /usr/bin that have the same name
> > as a binary in /usr/sbin (from the same, or
> > different packages) such that the packager
> > (or the multiple packages) will need to
> > coordinate the changes (perhaps by engaging
> > upstream).
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Unify_bin_and_sbin#Scope
> lists 9 packages that was aware of that use usermode.
>
> $ dnf5 repoquery -l $(dnf5 repoquery --whatprovides '/usr/sbin/*' --qf 
> '%{name}\n') | rg '/usr/s?bin/' | sed -r 's|(.*)/([^/]*)$|\2|' | sort | uniq 
> -c | rg -w 2
>
> says that /usr/sbin/{makemap,rpcinfo,rpcbind,sestatus,udevadm}
> "shadow" files in /usr/bin. But those are all symlinks, i.e. they will
> need just to be dropped to prevent a FTBFS. I added this list with
> four packages to the Scope section.

Thanks, but I think the query does not produce
all possible results, as I know for a fact that there is
a package (exabgp) that has both a /usr/sbin/exabgp-healthcheck
and a (different) /usr/bin/exabgp-healthcheck file
(which is why I prompted my query, as I expect
there might be others (I plan to fix exabgp)).
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2256825] perl-App-cpm-0.997015 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256825

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
   Fixed In Version||perl-App-cpm-0.997.015-1.fc
   ||40
Last Closed||2024-01-08 14:18:24



--- Comment #3 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-4387a79cc1 has been pushed to the Fedora 40 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256825

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202256825%23c3
--
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2256825] perl-App-cpm-0.997015 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256825



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-962cfe8374 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 39.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-962cfe8374


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256825

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202256825%23c2
--
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2256825] perl-App-cpm-0.997015 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256825

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED



--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-4387a79cc1 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 40.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-4387a79cc1


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256825

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202256825%23c1
--
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2257057] perl-Math-BigInt-GMP-1.7001 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2257057

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED
   Fixed In Version||perl-Math-BigInt-GMP-1.7001
   ||-1.fc40
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
Last Closed||2024-01-08 14:06:24



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-c6234bd268 has been pushed to the Fedora 40 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2257057

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202257057%23c2
--
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2256825] perl-App-cpm-0.997015 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256825

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC|jples...@redhat.com |
   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2256825
--
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2257057] perl-Math-BigInt-GMP-1.7001 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2257057

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED



--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-c6234bd268 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 40.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-c6234bd268


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2257057

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202257057%23c1
--
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2257058] perl-Math-BigInt-FastCalc-0.5018 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2257058

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

   Fixed In Version||perl-Math-BigInt-FastCalc-0
   ||.501.800-1.fc40
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
 Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED
Last Closed||2024-01-08 13:48:23



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-4b4fd620ba has been pushed to the Fedora 40 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2257058

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202257058%23c2
--
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F40 Change Proposal: F40 Change Proposal: Unify /usr/bin and /usr/sbin (System-Wide)

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Sun, Jan 07, 2024 at 04:58:23AM +0100, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> > Aoife Moloney wrote:
> >> == Summary ==
> >> The `/usr/sbin` directory becomes a symlink to `bin`, which means
> >> paths like `/usr/bin/foo` and `/usr/sbin/foo` point to the same place.
> >> `/bin` and `/sbin` are already symlinks to `/usr/bin` and `/usr/sbin`,
> >> so effectively `/bin/foo` and `/sbin/foo` also point to the same
> >> place. `/usr/sbin` will be removed from the default `$PATH`.
> > 
> > I am against this because it breaks my kannolo-root-unlocker package:
> > https://svn.calcforge.org/viewvc/kannolo/trunk/packages/kannolo-root-unlocker/kannolo-root-unlocker.spec?revision=270=markup
> > 
> > I do not want to patch/overwrite the binaries in /usr/bin (because it will
> > make the RPM verify fail, and also historically because it breaks
> > deltarpms, though AIUI we do not support those anymore anyway), so I put
> > the ones patched to accept running as root into /usr/sbin, which is
> > conveniently before /usr/bin in root's PATH. This change breaks that.
> > 
> > If this is implemented, I will have to change the kannolo-root-unlocker to
> > patch the binaries in place. But people who have the old version of
> > kannolo- root-unlocker installed may end up with corrupt binaries, because
> > the scriptlets of course do not expect %{_bindir} and %{_sbindir} to be
> > the same or symlinks to the same. (They are different macros for a
> > reason.)
> 
> Note that I already thought of using /usr/local/bin, in fact this was my 
> first attempt, but that does not work because kdesu does not search in 
> /usr/local/bin, and the KDE SIG also refused to fix that.

It really sounds like something to fix in kdesu.

Stripping directories out of $PATH is a not-thought-through security
theater. Essentially, by the time we get to kdesu, the system already
went through the full boot processes, including the whole graphical
session, so if there's an attacker who managed to put a rogue binary
in /usr/local/bin or /usr/local/sbin which are in the system $PATH,
the game is long over.

(Or in other words, if you can put a rogue binary there and execute
code as root as various points in the boot process, easily and
undectably, why would you wait until a human user happens to execute
kdesu??.)

Zbyszek
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2257058] perl-Math-BigInt-FastCalc-0.5018 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2257058

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED



--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-4b4fd620ba has been submitted as an update to Fedora 40.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-4b4fd620ba


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2257058

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202257058%23c1
--
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F40 Change Proposal: F40 Change Proposal: Unify /usr/bin and /usr/sbin (System-Wide)

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 10:02:55AM +0200, Panu Matilainen wrote:
> > On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 7:54 PM Aoife Moloney  wrote:
> > > 
> > > Wiki -> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Unify_bin_and_sbin
> > > 
> 
> I agree unifying the *programs* to a single directory makes sense. But I
> fail to see anything good come out of bringing all those system daemon
> executables into every users path.

To clarify: they already *are* in every user's path, see
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Unify_bin_and_sbin#Detailed_Description,
third para.

> This would seem like a good opportunity to move stuff that isn't supposed to
> be directly run as part of normal usage under /usr/libexec. I'm sure there
> are exceptions but as a rule of thumb, if it has a systemd service file then
> it should no longer be in %_sbindir.

This was also mentioned by Matthew Miller on discussion.fp.o and I
agree, but I think that that's an orthogonal issue. Individual
maintainers should evaluate this and do the move if they really think
that no one is calling the binary directly. This can be done before
or after the proposed change.

Zbyszek
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F40 Change Proposal: F40 Change Proposal: Unify /usr/bin and /usr/sbin (System-Wide)

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Sun, Jan 07, 2024 at 03:47:25PM +, Gary Buhrmaster wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 7:54 PM Aoife Moloney  wrote:
> >
> > Wiki -> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Unify_bin_and_sbin
> >
> 
> I do not see as part of the plan a process to
> go through all Fedora packages and identifying
> binaries in /usr/bin that have the same name
> as a binary in /usr/sbin (from the same, or
> different packages) such that the packager
> (or the multiple packages) will need to
> coordinate the changes (perhaps by engaging
> upstream).

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Unify_bin_and_sbin#Scope
lists 9 packages that was aware of that use usermode.

$ dnf5 repoquery -l $(dnf5 repoquery --whatprovides '/usr/sbin/*' --qf 
'%{name}\n') | rg '/usr/s?bin/' | sed -r 's|(.*)/([^/]*)$|\2|' | sort | uniq -c 
| rg -w 2

says that /usr/sbin/{makemap,rpcinfo,rpcbind,sestatus,udevadm}
"shadow" files in /usr/bin. But those are all symlinks, i.e. they will
need just to be dropped to prevent a FTBFS. I added this list with
four packages to the Scope section.

Zbyszek
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F40 Change Proposal: F40 Change Proposal: Unify /usr/bin and /usr/sbin (System-Wide)

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Mon, Jan 08, 2024 at 08:14:49AM +0100, Petr Pisar wrote:
> V Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 10:20:11AM +0100, Vít Ondruch napsal(a):
> > 
> > Dne 20. 12. 23 v 20:53 Aoife Moloney napsal(a):
> > > ** Adjust `%_sbindir` in `/usr/lib/rpm/macros` (part of `rpm`
> > > package). Packages will be updated automatically during the mass
> > > rebuild.
> > 
> > 
> > Isn't the ultimate goal to drop the `%_sbindir` all together? Shouldn't at
> > minimum the packaging guidelines be updated? We could probably drop the
> > `%_sbindir` automatically in near future.

I added a point about adjusting Packaging Guidelines to Scope section
in the Change proposal.

I don't think we want to drop %_sbindir anytime soon: people use the
same specs for older Fedora releases, CentOS, RHEL, OpenSUSE, etc, and
undefining %_sbindir would require a lot of updates and make it harder
to share the specs. OTOH, keeping the one-line definition of the macro
costs nothing.

> That or another, I'd like this Change to explicitly state whether packagers 
> are
> supposed to keep using %_sbindir, or to replace it with %_bindir in their spec
> files.

I added that to Summary now:

  The definition of %_sbindir will be changed to %_bindir, so packages
  will start using the new directory after a rebuild without any
  further action. Maintainers may stop using %_sbindir, but don't need
  to.

Zbyszek
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2257059] perl-Math-BigInt-2.003002 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2257059

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|MODIFIED|CLOSED
 Resolution|--- |ERRATA
   Fixed In Version||perl-Math-BigInt-2.0030.02-
   ||1.fc40
Last Closed||2024-01-08 13:12:23



--- Comment #2 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-0848702712 has been pushed to the Fedora 40 stable repository.
If problem still persists, please make note of it in this bug report.


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2257059

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202257059%23c2
--
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F40 Change Proposal: F40 Change Proposal: Unify /usr/bin and /usr/sbin (System-Wide)

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 06:15:13PM +, Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> On Thu, Dec 21, 2023 at 06:58:37PM +0100, Florian Weimer wrote:
> > * Aoife Moloney:
> > 
> > > == Detailed Description ==
> > > The split between `/bin` and `/sbin` is not useful, and also unused.
> > 
> > Programs in /usr/bin have their documentation in section 1 of the
> > manual, while programs /usr/sbin are documented in section 8.  (In
> > general, I deliberately used /usr/bin/ld.so although the manual page was
> > already called ld.so(8), without a program of this name existing.)
> > 
> > When moving programs, should we move the manual pages as well?  Or at
> > least add a link so that that section 1 references work?
> 
> The manual sections have historical meaning:
> 
>   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Man_page#Manual_sections
>   eg.
>   1 = general commands
>   8 = system administration
> 
> So unless the tools themselves are changing their purpose or are in
> the wrong section now, the manual sections should stay the same.

This a very good question and a very good answer ;) Thank you both.
I added this to point to the Feedback section on the wiki.

> > Is there something we can do to help developers on Fedora systems to
> > write portable code (not just shell scripts) after this change is rolled
> > out?

I don't think so. When considering compatiblity of stuff written
elsewhere and executed on Fedora, this change if anything increases
compatibility, because now both paths are now valid. Going the other
way, if somebody were to hardcode the path used on Fedora, that might
now be different than than in the past and different than some other
distro. But differences in paths already existed (the proposal has a
list), so this method wasn't reliable anyway. I think the correct
solution is not specify fixed paths at all, and just let $PATH do its
job.

Zbyszek
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2257059] perl-Math-BigInt-2.003002 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2257059

Fedora Update System  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|ASSIGNED|MODIFIED



--- Comment #1 from Fedora Update System  ---
FEDORA-2024-0848702712 has been submitted as an update to Fedora 40.
https://bodhi.fedoraproject.org/updates/FEDORA-2024-0848702712


-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2257059

Report this comment as SPAM: 
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla=report-spam_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202257059%23c1
--
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2257058] perl-Math-BigInt-FastCalc-0.5018 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2257058

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 CC|jples...@redhat.com,|
   |mspa...@redhat.com, |
   |ppi...@redhat.com   |
 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2257058
--
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[Bug 2257059] perl-Math-BigInt-2.003002 is available

[bugzilla]

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2257059

Jitka Plesnikova  changed:

   What|Removed |Added

 Status|NEW |ASSIGNED
 CC|jples...@redhat.com,|
   |mspa...@redhat.com, |
   |ppi...@redhat.com   |
   Doc Type|--- |If docs needed, set a value




-- 
You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2257059
--
___
perl-devel mailing list -- perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to perl-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/perl-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Fedora rawhide compose report: 20240108.n.0 changes

[Fedora Rawhide Report]

OLD: Fedora-Rawhide-20240107.n.0
NEW: Fedora-Rawhide-20240108.n.0

= SUMMARY =
Added images:3
Dropped images:  4
Added packages:  4
Dropped packages:4
Upgraded packages:   62
Downgraded packages: 0

Size of added packages:  4.08 MiB
Size of dropped packages:55.62 MiB
Size of upgraded packages:   2.21 GiB
Size of downgraded packages: 0 B

Size change of upgraded packages:   -514.67 KiB
Size change of downgraded packages: 0 B

= ADDED IMAGES =
Image: KDE live aarch64
Path: Spins/aarch64/iso/Fedora-KDE-Live-aarch64-Rawhide-20240108.n.0.iso
Image: Python_Classroom live x86_64
Path: 
Labs/x86_64/iso/Fedora-Python-Classroom-Live-x86_64-Rawhide-20240108.n.0.iso
Image: Python_Classroom raw-xz aarch64
Path: 
Labs/aarch64/images/Fedora-Python-Classroom-Rawhide-20240108.n.0.aarch64.raw.xz

= DROPPED IMAGES =
Image: Kinoite dvd-ostree ppc64le
Path: Kinoite/ppc64le/iso/Fedora-Kinoite-ostree-ppc64le-Rawhide-20240107.n.0.iso
Image: Sericea dvd-ostree x86_64
Path: Sericea/x86_64/iso/Fedora-Sericea-ostree-x86_64-Rawhide-20240107.n.0.iso
Image: Silverblue dvd-ostree aarch64
Path: 
Silverblue/aarch64/iso/Fedora-Silverblue-ostree-aarch64-Rawhide-20240107.n.0.iso
Image: i3 live aarch64
Path: Spins/aarch64/iso/Fedora-i3-Live-aarch64-Rawhide-20240107.n.0.iso

= ADDED PACKAGES =
Package: python-willow-1.7.0-1.fc40
Summary: A single API for multiple Python image libraries
RPMs:python3-willow
Size:138.66 KiB

Package: qtile-0.23.0-6.fc40
Summary: A pure-Python tiling window manager
RPMs:python3-libqtile python3-libqtile+wayland qtile qtile-wayland
Size:3.85 MiB

Package: rust-dtparse-2.0.0-1.fc40
Summary: Dateutil-compatible timestamp parser for Rust
RPMs:rust-dtparse+default-devel rust-dtparse-devel
Size:42.24 KiB

Package: rust-lscolors0.15-0.15.0-1.fc40
Summary: Colorize paths using the LS_COLORS environment variable
RPMs:rust-lscolors0.15+ansi_term-devel rust-lscolors0.15+crossterm-devel 
rust-lscolors0.15+default-devel rust-lscolors0.15+nu-ansi-term-devel 
rust-lscolors0.15-devel
Size:52.73 KiB


= DROPPED PACKAGES =
Package: appstream0.16-0.16.3-2.fc40
Summary: Utilities to generate, maintain and access the AppStream database
RPMs:appstream0.16 appstream0.16-devel appstream0.16-qt 
appstream0.16-qt-devel
Size:2.01 MiB

Package: kscd-17.08.3-15.fc39
Summary: CD Player
RPMs:kscd
Size:733.68 KiB

Package: libicu72-72.1-2.fc39
Summary: International Components for Unicode
RPMs:libicu72
Size:52.16 MiB

Package: python-subvertpy-0.10.1-23.fc40
Summary: Python bindings for Subversion
RPMs:python3-subvertpy
Size:752.83 KiB


= UPGRADED PACKAGES =
Package:  MUMPS-5.6.2-1.fc40
Old package:  MUMPS-5.5.1-6.fc40
Summary:  A MUltifrontal Massively Parallel sparse direct Solver
RPMs: MUMPS MUMPS-common MUMPS-devel MUMPS-examples MUMPS-mpich 
MUMPS-mpich-devel MUMPS-mpich-examples MUMPS-openmpi MUMPS-openmpi-devel 
MUMPS-openmpi-examples MUMPS-srpm-macros
Size: 40.82 MiB
Size change:  -2.57 MiB
Changelog:
  * Fri Jan 05 2024 Antonio Trande  - 5.6.2-1
  - Release 5.6.2
  - Disable MPICH tests


Package:  amg4psblas-1.1.2-2.fc40
Old package:  amg4psblas-1.1.2-1.fc40.1
Summary:  Algebraic Multigrid Package based on PSBLAS
RPMs: amg4psblas-doc amg4psblas-mpich amg4psblas-mpich-devel 
amg4psblas-mpich-static amg4psblas-openmpi amg4psblas-openmpi-devel 
amg4psblas-openmpi-static
Size: 744.50 MiB
Size change:  -4.16 MiB
Changelog:
  * Sat Jan 06 2024 Antonio Trande  - 1.1.2-2
  - Rebuild for MUMPS-5.6.2


Package:  artikulate-24.01.85-1.fc40
Old package:  artikulate-23.08.2-1.fc40
Summary:  Improve your pronunciation by listening to native speakers
RPMs: artikulate artikulate-libs
Size: 5.25 MiB
Size change:  -2.58 KiB
Changelog:
  * Sun Jan 07 2024 Alessandro Astone  - 24.01.85-1
  - 24.01.85


Package:  audex-0.98-1.fc40
Old package:  audex-0.79-19.fc39
Summary:  Audio ripper
RPMs: audex
Size: 2.91 MiB
Size change:  861.34 KiB
Changelog:
  * Tue Jan 02 2024 Yaakov Selkowitz  - 0.96.1-1
  - 0.96.1

  * Sun Jan 07 2024 Steve Cossette  - 0.98-1
  - 0.98 (Qt6)


Package:  calindori-24.01.85-1.fc40
Old package:  calindori-23.08.2-1.fc40
Summary:  Calendar application for Plasma Mobile
RPMs: calindori
Size: 1.19 MiB
Size change:  -182.73 KiB
Changelog:
  * Sun Jan 07 2024 Alessandro Astone  - 24.01.85-1
  - 24.01.85


Package:  cervisia-24.01.85-1.fc40
Old package:  cervisia-23.08.2-1.fc40
Summary:  CVS frontend
RPMs: cervisia
Size: 10.20 MiB
Size change:  -10.92 KiB
Changelog:
  * Sun Jan 07 2024 Alessandro Astone  - 24.01.85-1
  - 24.01.85


Package:  cmigemo-1.3-0.15.date20110227.fc40
Old package:  cmigemo-1.3-0.14.date20110227.fc39.9
Summary:  C interface of Ruby/Migemo Japanese incremental search tool
RPMs: cmigemo cmigemo-devel
Size: 19.22 MiB

Re: [heads-up] evolution-data-server libecal-2.0 soname version bump in rawhide

[Milan Crha]

On Mon, 2024-01-08 at 10:34 +0100, Milan Crha wrote:
> I'll handle those I've commit rights for, which is most of them.
>
> ...
>
>fedpkg build --target=f40-build-side-80962


Hi,
the leftover packages to be done, for which I do not have commit
rights, are:

   elementary-calendar
   evolution-chime (which is part of pidgin-chime)
   gnome-panel
   phosh

Any help appreciated.

Thanks and bye,
Milan
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Change of cronie and crontabs CIS compliance

[Ondrej Pohorelsky]

Thank you for your feedback.

After some thinking, I've decided to not start the Fedora Change process,
nor to merge these changes.
These changes are not suited for Fedora use cases.

Once again, I appreciate the discussion

On Tue, Dec 19, 2023 at 7:14 PM Tomáš Mráz  wrote:

> In my opinion none of these permission changes make any sense for
> installations that aren't guided by some mostly much more strict
> requirements than those for the Fedora workstations or other general
> installations of Fedora. They simply should not be applied.
>
> Removing the setuid bit from the crontab command is simply wrong as it
> breaks crontab for regular users.
>
> I do not even know why the /var/spool/anacron/cron.* permissions on the
> ghost files should be set to executable by owner - there is no point doing
> that as that makes the permissions more allowing than they currently are.
>
> And making /etc/cron.d and /etc/cron.hourly unreadable to anybody else
> than root will break the possibility to examine what would be the next job
> run by the cronnext command.
> --
> ___
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct:
> https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives:
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Do not reply to spam, report it:
> https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
>


-- 

Ondřej Pohořelský

Software Engineer

Red Hat 

opoho...@redhat.com

--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

[heads-up] evolution-data-server libecal-2.0 soname version bump in rawhide

[Milan Crha]

Hi,
the 3.51.1 release of the evolution-data-server contains a soname
version bump of a libecal-2.0 library, due to an API change in one
function. I do not think it affects the dependencies, thus only
a simple rebuild should be needed, otherwise a new parameter will be
added to the call of the function.

According to `dnf repoquery --whatrequires libecal-2.0.so* --alldeps`
these are the affected packages:

  almanah
  bijiben
  elementary-calendar
  evolution
  evolution-chime
  evolution-data-server-devel
  evolution-data-server-tests
  evolution-ews
  evolution-mapi
  evolution-pst
  evolution-rspam
  gnome-calendar
  gnome-panel
  gnome-shell
  gnome-todo
  phosh
  syncevolution-libs

I'll handle those I've commit rights for, which is most of them.

I created a side tag f40-build-side-80962, where the data server is
built. You can use:

   fedpkg build --target=f40-build-side-80962

to build your packages in it too. I plan to merge the side tag in
a week or so.

Bye,
Milan
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: f39-candidate ~> f39-build stuck or something?

[Milan Crha]

On Fri, 2024-01-05 at 15:15 +0100, Kalev Lember wrote:
> So my suggestion would be to use a self service side tag for rawhide
> as well, not just F39.

Hi,
thanks for the confirmation. It means more manual work to be done (and
not be forgotten), but I see it has also its advantages. I'll do it
that way.

Bye,
Milan
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: Package GNU Hello build errors

[Vít Ondruch]

Just FTR, there is attachment with logs. I have not noticed it on the 
first look, but Leigh did :)



Vít



Dne 07. 01. 24 v 1:41 Alexander Ploumistos napsal(a):

Hello Patrick,

What was the command you issued? Were there any errors before the
excerpt you've posted? Does your user belong to the 'mock' group?


Best regards,
A.
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue


OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: CMake's check-compiles fails to parse WITH_GZFILEOP

[Milan Crha]

On Fri, 2024-01-05 at 12:50 +0100, Ian McInerney via devel wrote:
> An interesting thing to note about that is that it is using ;-list
> formatting in CMake for this call, but according to the docs for
> CheckCSourceCompiles, these CMAKE_REQUIRED_<> variables should have
> the values space-separated, not as a ;-list
> (https://cmake.org/cmake/help/latest/module/CheckCSourceCompiles.html
> ), so that should probably be fixed in EDS to see if the problem
> stays or if it goes away.

Hi,
thank you for the analyzes. I checked it's used incorrectly on other
places too. This also had been addressed long ago [1], but it strikes
back because I forgot of this and did not pay attention to the CMake
documentation.

Doing a similar change as in the [1] fixes the build problem.

Thanks and bye,
Milan

[1] https://bugzilla.gnome.org/show_bug.cgi?id=773659
--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue

Re: F40 Change Proposal: F40 Change Proposal: Unify /usr/bin and /usr/sbin (System-Wide)

[Panu Matilainen]

On Wed, Dec 20, 2023 at 7:54 PM Aoife Moloney  wrote:


Wiki -> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Unify_bin_and_sbin



I agree unifying the *programs* to a single directory makes sense. But I 
fail to see anything good come out of bringing all those system daemon 
executables into every users path.


This would seem like a good opportunity to move stuff that isn't 
supposed to be directly run as part of normal usage under /usr/libexec. 
I'm sure there are exceptions but as a rule of thumb, if it has a 
systemd service file then it should no longer be in %_sbindir.


- Panu -

--
___
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: 
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam, report it: 
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue